Parallel explorations in LA-NSCLC: Chemoradiation dose-response optimisation considering immunotherapy and cardiac toxicity sparing.

Background and Purpose: Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally-advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) has undergone advances, including increased overall survival (OS) when combined with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), and using cardiac-sparing techniques to reduce the radiotoxicity. This research investigated 1) how radiotherapy schedules can be optimised with CRT-ICB schemes, and 2) how cardiac-sparing might change the OS for concurrent CRT (cCRT).
Methods and Materials: Survival data and dosimetric indices were sourced from published studies, with 2-year OS standardised and the hazard ratio of mean heart dose (MHD) against radiotoxicity tabulated in purpose. A published CRT dose-response model was selected, then modified with ICB and cardiac-sparing hypotheses. Models were maximum likelihood fitted, then visualised the prediction outcomes after bootstrapping.
Results: The modelled 2-year OS rate of cCRT-ICB reached 71 % (95 % confidence intervals, CI 62 %, 84 %) and 66 % (95 % CI: 53 %, 81 %) for stage IIIA and IIIB/C, respectively, given 60 Gy in 2 Gy-per-fraction. 60 Gy in 30 fractions remained the best schedule for cCRT-ICB, whereas modest dose de-escalation to 55 Gy only reduced the OS in 2 %. Sequential CRT (sCRT)-ICB provided 6 % OS increases versus the best OS rate achieved by sCRT alone. Photon MHD-sparing achieved a 5-10 % increase in modelled 2-year OS, with protons providing a further roughly 5-10 % increase.
Conclusion: Neither dose-escalation nor de-escalation relative to 60 Gy in 30 fractions influenced the survival with cCRT-ICB, while 5 Gy dose de-escalation might benefit patients with heavily irradiated organs at risk. Cardiac-sparing improved OS, and protons provided advantages for tumours anatomically overlapped or lay below the heart.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)